From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: If not Ada, what else...
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:35:59 +0200
Organization: cbb software GmbH
Message-ID: <wubr7sju24uf.1emgiu7iypp5l.dlg@40tude.net>
References: <iomd56$c1s$1@dont-email.me>
 <87k2u96jms.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>
 <06f8a6f9-d219-4d40-b9ac-8518e93839bd@googlegroups.com>
 <87y4io63jy.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>
 <7a29d3e9-d1bd-4f4a-b1a6-14d3e1a83a4d@googlegroups.com>
 <87mvz36fen.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net>
 <2215b44f-8a89-47c6-a4c4-52b74d2dac45@googlegroups.com>
 <f5b22bff-4191-4478-82ed-181e024c5bcd@googlegroups.com>
 <mnqs6l$mdm$2@dont-email.me>
 <9e492c82-868d-43d3-a18a-38274400e337@googlegroups.com>
 <c5e815ac-8987-44cf-b66c-c25403887e39@googlegroups.com>
 <40184feb-4053-4ac3-8eaa-c3bd9cd8a77c@googlegroups.com>
 <10272577-945f-4682-85bc-8ad47f3653ae@googlegroups.com>
 <87si8i81k2.fsf@atmarama.net>
 <e3023a92-0087-490c-8d51-daccf89a309d@googlegroups.com>
 <d17drnF4b0qU1@mid.individual.net> <lymvypjqdq.fsf@pushface.org>
 <1gsux33dqvjbp$.h0prf7p7g2vn.dlg@40tude.net> <lyegk1jk41.fsf@pushface.org>
 <5z82vu617j2h$.ls4rgwlc79r4.dlg@40tude.net> <lya8uok768.fsf@pushface.org>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5ZS5s7Q3rAN7MBP/UXLPIQ.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:26962
Date: 2015-07-22T09:35:59+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 08:01:03 +0100, Simon Wright wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> The object's private part should not appear in the package's public
>> part.  It is a privacy breach.
> 
> To the eye, yes, but not to using software. If I can look at the overall
> spec, I can see the private part anyway.

You can see bodies as well. What not to eliminate bodies and pack all the
code right at the declaration point?

> More to the point, devolving the private part of a protected type to the
> private part of the enclosing package spec would resolve a lot of
> declaration ordering problems;

Is it an argument for or against it?

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de